madlik

The conversation also touched on the interpretation of the Exodus story in terms of economic equality and power structures, shedding light on the multifaceted influence of these spirituals on King’s messages of justice and equality. The participants also discussed a speech given after the 1967 war, highlighting the importance of peace and economic security in the Middle East. The speakers emphasized the message of economic security as a means to prevent desperation and violence, aligning with the speaker’s previous writings and discussions on the topic. Finally, the episode concluded with Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic “I Have a Dream” speech, inspiring hope for a society where all individuals can live out the true meaning of equality and liberty.

Geoffrey Stern: So Rabbi, I look back last year and I did a solo podcast on liberation theology. I was in the holy city of Jerusalem and my guess is you were traveling to Dubai because you just told me you were leaving for Dubai next week.

Adam Mintz: I probably was, right.

GS: We discussed how Christians, especially in South America, took the story of the Exodus and used it and created something called liberation theology. And we ended up talking about how some Jews, we discussed Jon Levinson from Harvard and Yeshayahu Leibovitch. How they had a very minimal understanding of what the Exodus meant to us. And we’ll get back to them during the course of tonight’s event. But because we are on the eve of Martin Luther King weekend, I thought it would be a wonderful experience to look at some of his writings, specifically the I Have a Dream speech, and an interview I had no idea existed, as I said in the intro, that was made ten days before he was assassinated, and just as meaningfully, after the Six-Day War.

So we’re in for a little bit of a treat tonight, I hope, and I just want to say that today was Rosh Chodesh Shabbat, and I was having a discussion with my grandson Ari about two years ago. He goes to a beautiful progressive school called the Abraham Joshua Heschel School, and I said, what do you learn in school? And he goes, well, we learn about the [Jewish] holidays and stuff. I said, well, what holiday is it this month? [Thinking he would reference Tu b’shvat] What Jewish holiday is it? And he says, Oh, it’s Martin Luther King Day.

It’s Martin Luther King Day. So I think at least from his perspective, Martin Luther King is a Jewish holiday. And I think if we’re successful, if I’m successful with the texts, I think that that concept will resonate with us just a little bit. I don’t know if you celebrate Martin Luther King, if he resonates with you.

AM: We sure do. It resonates with me and I don’t give class that day. Very much resonates. It’s a good topic for today.

GS: In this source sheet, one of the sources I quote is from www.TheTorah.com  and in the intro the scholar says he listens to that speech every year. So we shall see that it really does resonate because it’s a midrash, it’s a commentary. So we are in Vayera, Exodus 7.26, and basically it says, HaShem said to Moses, go to Pharaoh and say to him, thus said God, let my people go, that they may worship me. Sholach et ami viavduni. Now this is not the only time in the Chumash that we have these iconic words, let my people go, and in Exodus 5.1 it says, Thus said God, let my people go that they may celebrate a festival for me in the wilderness.

The Significance of Yetziat Mitzrayim

4:22 GS So last year I made the case that there is a Midrash that says that every holiday in Judaism is Zecher l’yetziat Mitzrayim. I mean, basically, you cannot do pretty much anything in Judaism that you don’t make a blessing that somehow ties it in to Yetziat Mitzrayim. I think it’s safe to say that leaving Egypt or Throwing off the Pharaoh is a seminal, an absolutely seminal nation-forming moment in our Jewish tradition. Would you agree with me?

AM: I would absolutely agree with that.

GS: So the question that I asked last year and the question I’m asking today is, how does that seminal moment and iconic paradigm translate to the world? And last year, we talked about a lot of Christian scholars who basically took it. And when they were up against a tyrant a dictator he became the pharaoh and they became the children of Israel. If they had a trade of our if they had a Che Guevarra, if they had a Castro and then ultimately when they decided to overthrow Castro and they had a new leader they were always the Moses …not so much when it comes to the Jewish people I think in talking about Martin Luther King, we’ll see that he walked a very fine line where he never took it away from the Jewish people, and I think that impacts upon what his interpretation was of the uniqueness of Yitziat Mitzrayim.

So I think, you know, you would be remiss, and if you were asking, what is the meaning of Yetziat Mitzrayim to the Jews, if you didn’t quote the numerous passages in the Torah, such as the one in Deuteronomy 24.17, that say, you shall not subvert the rights of the stranger or the fatherless, you shall not take a widow’s garment in pawn. Remember that you were a slave in Egypt and that your God redeemed you from there, therefore do I enjoin you to observe this commandment.” So the concept is less about any coming to the land of Israel, getting the Torah. It has to be that you understand at a visceral level what it means to be exploited, what it means when people are not treated in an equitable, fair way, and therefore you have to treat people in an equitable and fair way. And I think that’s our key understanding of the concept. Last year we ended up by saying that Levinson said that “Avduni” is the key word. Let my people go to serve you. You don’t serve Pharaoh, you serve our God, and the way you serve God is by keeping his law. Not only his festivals, but his laws of weights, his laws of paying the worker on time.

We are a people of law, and if there is anything about the law that is impactful is that it has to be applied to everybody in an equal way. So I think you will never say to me, Rabbi, you agree totally. This is a thread. This is certainly a gishah, a way of looking at this. But I think it’s a fairly mainstream one.

AM: Very much mainstream. And you know, you said, you quote the Midrash that every Jewish holiday is in commemoration of the Exodus. And you can go further than that. Obviously, the major Jewish holiday, the entire ceremony of that holiday is the Seder to remember the Exodus from Egypt. Right, it’s literally the biggest ceremony of the year, is Zecher Litziat Mitzrayim.

GS: Absolutely, absolutely. So I want to start by just quoting an African-American spiritual. And the theme is, let my people go. Go down, Moses, way down in Egypt land. Tell old Pharaoh to let my people go. Oh, when Israel was in Egypt land, let my people go. Oppressed so hard they could not stand, let my people go. So the Lord said, go down, go down, Moses, way, way down in Egypt land. Tell all pharaohs to let my people go. So Moses went to Egypt’s land. Let my people go. Let my people go. The takeaway that I took in there are many versions of this song is when it says tell all pharaohs.

It was clear to the writers of this song and the singers of this song that Pharaoh was not a point in time and the Exodus was not a moment in time. That it transcends time and it affects anybody who is feeling that they are pushed down, that they are oppressed. Oppression is the key word here, and that there is someone who will stand up, truth to power, so to speak, to take them out. And that is, I think, the core that the African Americans took, and therefore this song and this concept resonated so strongly with them.

AM: I mean, there’s a lot to be said for the fact that let my people go is in a sense musical, right? I mean, it’s a lot in the translation, shalach ami v’avduni, that’s powerful. But “let my people go” is really, you know, really lends itself to a black spiritual.

GS: Yes. So what I was amazed by is that if you do a Google search for, I have a dream speech, and the Bible, there are so many scholars, historians, scholars in literature, and as importantly, scholars in scripture who have studied this speech and how these spirituals and the concept, the paradigm of the Israelites, Moses, Pharaoh in Egypt has resonated. And one of them that I came across was called Second Isaiah Lands in Washington, D.C. by Keith Miller. And what he explains is that, and it really hit me when he says, a white chaplain in the Union Army regretfully noted, there is no part of the Bible with which slaves are so familiar as the story of the deliverance of Israel.

Moses is their ideal of all that is high and noble and perfect in man. That the American abolitionists frequently paralleled American slaves to Hebrews in Egypt. And even former slaves intent on moving to Kansas christened themselves “Exodusters”. So this was like so powerful an image to so many people. And in the I Have a Dream speech, they go verse by verse or stanza by stanza and say, what does Martin Luther King do in terms of drawing from the Old Testament? So at one point he says,

We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. And that is a direct quote from Amos 5. That talks about the Jewish people at the time, and in the words of God, it says,

I loathe, I spurn your festivals. I am not appeased by your solemn assemblies. If you offer me burnt offerings or grain offerings, I will not accept them. I will pay no heed to your gifts or fatlings, your sacrifices. Spare me the sounds of your hymns, and let me not hear the music of your lutes, but let justice well up like water, righteousness like an unfailing stream.

It seems, and I think this will come through clearer, for Martin Luther King’s understanding of the Exodus, it was all about dealing with people equitably. Evenly. And this idea of justice like water and righteousness like an unfailing stream, this concept of going down to Egypt, this idea of leveling the playing field, of going down to the weakest member and making sure that they have the same access and same opportunities. That is the core of what I think Luther, and we’ll see as he takes away these speeches, what he was looking for. And a lot of it has to do with economic justice.

14:18 AM So I just want to say, I mean of course you’re right, that’s not the Torah’s view of the Exodus. That’s more the prophet’s view of equality. If you look at Amos, if you look at Isaiah, you have a lot more of economic equality. The Torah doesn’t portray the exodus from Egypt as being about economic equality. It’s about freedom from slavery. It’s like you quoted Leibowitz, that it’s about v’avduni, that we should serve God and not serve Pharaoh. But, right, there’s nothing about economics, really.

It’s not that slavery isn’t fair economically.

GS: Well, except you can make the argument that when the verse that I quoted at the beginning from Deuteronomy, when it talks about you shall not mistreat the fatherless, the stranger, the widow’s garment in porn, these are people that are economically dependent and at risk. So there is a little bit of it. I think that clearly the prophetic tradition took that and maximized it and elevated it. But I think there is something there. All of those quotes that say don’t do this because you were a slave in Egypt have to do with dealing with someone, and you can argue whether it’s economically less off or from a power point of view are less off.

So maybe if I had to translate what you’re saying, it’s not only economics. I think it also has to do with people who just don’t have the resources, the power structure.

AM Right. It’s about a power structure. It’s about an inequality in a power structure. Now, you’re right. Economics is a piece of that.

16:25 GS So the other big phrase that he says is, I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight. And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see again. Now was Isaiah 40.

Let every valley be raised, every hill and mount made low, let the rugged ground become level, let the ridges become plain, the presence of God shall appear and all flesh as one shall behold for God has spoken. So he is quoting Isaiah And the amazing thing about this verse in Isaiah is that we’ve quoted it before. We quoted even the story of Agnon, Ha’akov le’mishur, making the crooked straight. But clearly, this verse, similarly to the one from Amos about the water going down and finding its level, it seems to me that it’s very much about leveling the playing field, to use an economic term.

And that’s what comes off very clear. The other verse that I quoted from Amos, which actually blew me away, which God talks about, to me, O Israelites, you are just like the Cushites. So the Israelites are just like the blacks, declares God. True, I brought Israel up from the land of Egypt, but also the Philistines from Kaphtor and the Arameans from Kir. So getting back to your point, Rabbi, yes, the prophets really did go a long way in universalizing the message.

AM: See, to me, that’s a really important point. Because your point of the way Martin Luther King uses this story, the truth of the matter is that 3,000 years ago,

GS: That’s what the prophets did. And he would not argue with you. He was not trying to be an innovator. Yes. I think in a sense, you know, when his other speech when he talks about being to the mountaintop and I might not make it, he clearly saw himself as a Moses figure, but I don’t think it was out of any sense of pride or feeling that he was a great, I think it was out of responsibility and out of the sense that he was put into this place from history and he had kind of no choice. But definitely he was seen that way and definitely he plays that role.

And getting back to the verse from Amos that I quoted before, that he says the Israelites are like the Cushites and like the Philistines and the Arameans, and meaning to say every nation has its pharaoh, every nation has its Exodus, and has to find its Moses, he ends by saying This will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with new meaning, my country, tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing, land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim’s pride, from every mountainside let freedom sing, and then this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, When we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, free at last, free at last.

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last. So that was how he ended the speech, and he really is talking about equality, of everybody should be treated the same, you know, and again, we can’t but help, but think of what the rhetoric is today, when a person of a certain color skin, let’s say is white, is automatically targeted as whether it’s a colonialist, or privileged, or an exploiter, and everyone who has a slightly more pigmentation is already put in a different field. What he was saying rings so much more powerfully in my mind, that the idea is that we should not look at the color of one’s skin, but of the character inside.

And I think that is a message that he could easily take from the prophets, which I interpret in terms of everything he’s been saying as this kind of equalizing wave, and I think it’s a message that rings true especially today.

21:54 AM: There’s no question that well, let’s take a few things. It rings true, especially today. And you know, that’s something about the eternity of these messages, because it comes from the Torah, and it’s elaborated upon by the prophets. And then Martin Luther King makes it famous 60 years ago. And it’s just as true in 2024. So I mean, I think that that’s about the fact that the messages of the Torah, the power of the Torah isn’t in the moment, but it’s for all times.

GS: I agree. The only thing that I will say, and now I’m going to get a little bit into this interview that I discussed earlier that he gave at the 68th Annual Convention of the Rabbinical Assembly of Conservative Judaism. The way I understand him now, after reading these texts, is that clearly economic equity, economic justice, and equality before the law were what he was aiming for. Not revenge, not flipping the switch, not flipping the table. He understood that we can all be Egyptians, we can all be pharaohs, we can all be children of Israel, we can all be Moses’s.

Discussion on Middle East Peace and Economic Security

GS: And what we need to find is the path of justice. And I think he was asked at this convention about Israel and the Arabs. And as I said in the intro, it was after the 1967 war, and everybody, when they talk after the 1967 war, says that Israel was now no longer the David, it became the Goliath. And I think that’s not such a great model. I think the model that he was looking for is more of this exodus model and one of making equality. So he says as follows in answer to the question of where he stands on the Middle East.

I think it is necessary to say that what is basic and what is needed in the Middle East is peace. Peace for Israel is one thing. Peace for the Arab side of that world is another thing. Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all of our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the greatest outposts of democracy in the world and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land almost can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy.

Peace for Israel means security, and that security must be a reality. On the other hand, we must see what peace for the Arabs means in a real sense of security on another level. Peace for the Arabs means the kind of economic security that they so desperately need. These nations, as you know, are part of that third world of hunger, of disease, of illiteracy. I think that as long as these conditions exist, there will be tensions. There will be the endless quest to find scapegoats. So there is a need for a Marshall Plan for the Middle East, where we lift those who are at the bottom of the economic ladder and bring them into the mainstream of economic security.

I just thought that, number one, it rang so true, but the reason it rings so true is he doesn’t talk about states, he doesn’t talk about sovereignty, he doesn’t talking about having, he talks about economic security. For the Arabs and to me it was just, it wasn’t a kind of a detour from his message. It was the message that he had been preaching in all of the writings that we’ve discussed tonight and so many others. That the law has to be equal and there has to be economic security and if there isn’t then you get into desperation and violence.

Discussion on Martin Luther King Jr.’s Views on Black-Jewish Relations

GS: I was just kind of blown away from that, and I do quote the whole—I have a source for the whole interview, it was a public interview, ten days before he was killed, and it’s in the Sephira notes. The only thing that I’ll also add that also rang so true was one of the questions was that there were already in those days radical Black Panthers and others who were calling him a whitey, is how it’s referred to in the interview, you can call it an Uncle Tom, that he was kind of being part of the white world.

And he gets a chance to talk about color. He says, on the Middle East crisis, we have various responses. The response of some of the so-called militants again, does not represent the position of the vast majority of Negroes. There are some who are color-consumed, and they see a kind of mystique in being colored, and anything non-colored is condemned. We do not follow that course in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.” He goes on to say, talking about anti-Semitism, it is not only that anti-Semitism is immoral, though that alone is enough.

It is used to divide Negro and Jew, who have effectively collaborated in the struggle for justice. It injures Negroes because it upholds the doctrine of racism, which they have the greatest stake in destroying. There isn’t anyone in this country more likely to understand our struggle than Jews. Whatever progress we’ve made so far as a people, their support has been essential, probably more than any other ethnic group. The Jewish community has been sympathetic and has stood as an ally to the Negro in this struggle.

It was just very, very refreshing, Rabbi.

27:58 AM: I mean, that’s so interesting, of course, because just then 1968 is when, you know, the Black Power, like you mentioned, the Black Power movement was just gaining force. It really gained force only after the assassination of Martin Luther King, but they all of a sudden didn’t see the Jews as partners anymore. There was a famous case in Ocean Hill, Brownsville, in the school district. In which the blacks took over the school district and they try to push out the Jewish teachers because they didn’t see the Jews as being their allies anymore.

So he’s really, he’s talking about really what we would call a much healthier vision of Jews and blacks being partners. And that’s an amazing image that he has of Israel after 67, when things were so bad for the Arabs after 67, but he turns that biblical vision into a vision for contemporary Israel. That’s amazingly powerful.

GS: And in the full interview, he literally has a whole page on black power, and he says it is a terrible bumper sticker. And he even goes so far as to say that any phrase that you have that takes five minutes to explain what we mean is like a joke that you have to explain. It’s not very effective. It’s a fascinating, fascinating interview, and to me it’s a fascinating reboot, but it also, as we’re in Shemot, as we’re discussing the Exodus and approaching Martin Luther King Day, it gives us all, I think, pause to look back at the Exodus story and the traditions that we share in the world shares at explaining, understanding, be inspired by the Exodus story.

And I think it is a better paradigm and model than maybe a David and a Goliath There are some of the, as you research the sources, it talks about why Moses was picked and not a David, why not a king but actually a popular ruler. It talks about the whole dynamics between the South and the North. He’s asked about anti-Semitism in the interview, and he says, we don’t have anti-Semitism down South. He says and he explains what happened when Negroes went to the north and they went into tenements that might have been vacated by Jews and the Jews became their landlords and the pricing was different.

And then he talks about, you know, when there’s one bad apple, you can’t blame a whole race because that’s called, wait, wait for it, racism. So, it’s just, I think, very—it’s like when you look back at your biblical sources, I think looking back at a speech like this, looking back at a man like this, and his message is very refreshing, and if you can call it a reboot, you can call it a hazara. The point is, I think it’s important from time to time to do that. And I felt blessed last night when I was thinking about what to talk about.

I will say that there is another book that I quote in my sources, and it’s from a friend of mine, Dumasani Washington. You might remember, Rabbi, we had him on one year to discuss Parshat Noach. He has an absolutely amazing book called Zionism and the Black Church, and it is a source book and an inspiration so that none of you think that this close working relationship between Jews and the African Americans has ended. That it’s a thing of the past. Read his book and go to his website. It is happening even today.

And so there is a light at the end of that tunnel as well. And we just have to keep talking about our sources and looking for inspiration for our great leaders in a generation that is so lacking in them.

32:27 AM: And I think the answer is, you know, in these days, which has so much darkness, you know, to look at the sources and to know that there’s light is really a very important lesson for all of us. So thank you so much, Jeffrey. Next week from the UAE, I look forward to sharing Parshat Bo. Shabbat Shalom, everybody, and thank you so much.

GS: Shabbat Shalom, and I must say that since I was kind of inspired by the Torah.com where he said every year he listens to this speech, so here it is. Shabbat shalom.

Martin Luthur King Jr. I Have A Dream speech https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety

Geoffrey Stern: Well, welcome to another week, Rabbi, and I know you have a busy day today. You are involved with a conversion in the morning and a celebration of the conversion in the afternoon.

Adam Mintz: It’s nice in the middle of the day to be able to discuss the Parshah.

GS: To learn a little Torah. So as I said in the intro, we’re going to kind of review a book. Now I heard of this book on Daniel Gordis’ podcast, which is called Israel from the Inside. And he featured this author who he knew. The author is a professor at Emory University and it was in November, so we’re talking about just a month after the war started, and the book literally came out in October of 2023. So it’s a book on the Bible, on the origins of the Bible, the purpose of the Bible, and all that.

But it was interesting enough to Daniel Gordis to bring on to his very Israel-oriented, at these times, war-oriented podcast. And there’s a link to it in our notes. But he says that this guy, Jacob Wright, makes a really astonishing claim, which is that the Hebrew Bible is fundamentally formed around not a celebration of Jewish life, but around catastrophe. Catastrophe plays, he argues in that article, a central role to the way that we think about Jews and about ourselves and our place in the world.

So just that kind of piqued my curiosity, and as a result, I went ahead and bought the book, and I was reading it over the new year. So we are starting a new book of Shemot, of Exodus, And according to our right and according to my title, it’s really about a birth of a nation. And for us to see this in the Bible’s own text, we have to fast forward and jump to Deuteronomy. Because as you know, Rabbi, I love the Seder. I love the core Magid part of the Seder, where we recite the ancient formula of the Bikurim.

And there it says in Deuteronomy 26.5, the famous thing about my father was a fugitive Aramean. He went down to Egypt with meager numbers and sojourned there. But there he became a great and very populous nation. By Yehisham L’Goy Gadol Atzum V’Rav. And one of the things we’re going to focus on today, and Wright certainly focuses on, is that although the English word for the Book of Shemot is Exodus, you could easily make the case that less than the focus being on the leaving of Egypt the rebellion against the pharaoh, even the entry into the land, you could make the case that the book of Exodus, called Shemot, which is names, is really the story of the formation of the nation.

And so it becomes more of a story about who we are as a people than any particular activity or drama related to the story. And I think that’s actually Morris. You could even make the argument that the name Shemot, which has to do with our names of our people, is actually even a little bit more appropriate from this vantage point than the word Exodus. What are your thoughts on this?

AM: I think I mean, I think that’s good. I mean, you have to give credit to Exodus for a minute also. Exodus is not a bad name, because that is the story of the book, right? But I think, you know, but Shemot gives a whole different perspective. I’ll just say, and we’ll get there, that, you know, the rabbis have a different name from this book. They call it Volume 2, Sefer Hashemi, that it’s really the continuation of the Book of B’reishit, which is a whole other discussion, which is great.

GS: Well, but again, I think what you’re saying is really compliments what I’m saying, or at least what I said in the intro, that there is this Gordian knot between the book of Genesis, Bereshit, and the book of Shemot, because I don’t think they refer to the third book as the third book. They do not.

AM: They do not. Vayikra is separate.

GS: So I really like that. So the first thing we’re going to do before we get to this new book and this Professor Wright, who really looks at it from a much more, I guess, scientific and academic perspective, is we’re going to look at the classical texts because you know Rabbi, I always feel that as radical a scholar as you can find based on the most up-to-date scientific findings, typically they never say anything that the rabbis hadn’t already figured out on their own. It’s always true, Yes, so, the first, I want to make a few, I guess, parallels between verses in Genesis and Exodus.

And the first is the most obvious. Exodus starts, as I said before, Ve’elu shemot b’nei Yisrael. These are the names of the sons of Israel who came to Egypt. And in Genesis 46.8, which you could clearly make a case is just a segue, it says the same thing, ve’elu sh’mot b’nei Yisrael, ha’abai im mitzrayimu. But the Ramban, one of those classical commentaries, already says that there is a key connection, and you touched upon it by saying that Exodus is considered Book Two. He says that Scripture designs to reckon the subject of the exile from the time they went down to Egypt and link it with the story before.

He talks about it as a story of exile, the first story of exile, and it is for this reason that he returns to the beginning of the subject stated in the book of Genesis, which is to connect this. This adds another element that I hadn’t touched upon. We talked about birth of a nation. Of a birth of a nation, it’s fascinating that that birth is in exile, that that birth is the result of a catastrophe, so to speak. So even that is kind of a giveaway in terms of what right comes at from a whole totally different perspective.

There is a weekly parsha, commentary from Hadar, and the rabbi there, Rabbi David Kasher, says that the Ramban, in his masterful fashion, manages to quickly both give a philosophical and a literary explanation for the repetition of the verse. Conceptually, he argues that the central problem in the book of Exodus is not slavery but exile. So it was the descent into Egypt in the earlier book that set the stage for the struggle the children of Israel will be contending with in this book.

As a matter of reading strategy then, he explains that the Torah uses the callback as a device to emphasize the interconnectedness of these two books. If the Torah wants us to remember the descent into Egypt instead of a lengthy exposition, it can use six words from a scene in Genesis. So he wrote, and there is a link in the Sefaria notes to his article, he goes out of his way to say that the Ramban and others are linking these two stories, and again he makes that distinction between slavery and redemption to exile and forming a nation.

So the the next verse that he brings is exodus 1 7 and there it says that Uber is el peru vi is suvi bovi at sumo bma odm od but the israelites were fertile and prolific they multiplied and increased very greatly and he links that to Genesis 1.28, the story of creation. And God blessed them and said to be, be fertile and increase, fill the earth and master it. Peru or a u malu e aits I guess at the heart of this is we are dealing with texts, we are dealing with textual references. I guess you would have to be blind to not make that connection in terms of word choice, that whereas in Genesis we’re talking about the creation of humanity, of creatures, and them filling the earth, Here we’re talking about the young Israelites coming into Egypt and similarly the creation of this people.

Do you think they have a leg to stand on?

AM: Yeah, for sure they have a leg to stand on, but you know, this is also a description of destruction. So Peru vayisrtzu vyirbu veyatzumu b’maod, maod, v’timaleh Haretz, but those people are trying to be destroyed, while the story at the beginning of the Torah is about creation to make, you know, to make the world whole. So it’s actually the opposite.

GS: Well, I mean in Exodus when it says that they were greatly increasing, I mean from their perspective they were growing. To is from Pharaoh’s perspective.

AM: Right, that’s correct. It depends whose perspective you look at,

GS: But granted, correct. But in terms of the word choice, there’s no question that it’s paralleling the Genesis. He goes on in Exodus 2.2, it says and it’s talking about the birth of Moses. The woman conceived and bore a son and when she saw how beautiful he was, she hid him for three months. Well, the translation from JPS is not exactly correct. Because it misses out, misses the boat. It says, when she saw Oto Kitov hu, that he was good, and our good buddy Everett Fox, of course, says how goodly and handsome he was, and he says what is important is the Genesis connection.

The Birth of Moses and Its Connections

GS: So here, too, in Genesis, we have this word ma’od, tov and tov ma’od. And we’ve already seen even in the prior verse when it was talking about how they grew, they were growing ma’od, ma’od. And here you have ki tov. The Hadar Devar Torah that I referenced before, There he actually quotes the Talmud in Sotah. And the Talmud in Sotah asks why does it say Tov? So here’s a tidbit. This I had not known before. We all know Moses’ name given by him by the princess of Egypt. But what was his given name?

I just went to a Brit today over Zoom, and I heard the baby’s name. What was Moses called? So it is taught in a brighter, that Rabbi Meir says Tov is his, Moses’ real name, as it was given to him by his parents when he was born. Tuvia. Rabbi Yehuda said his name was Tuvia. I guess that’s like says they said he was good because they saw that he was fit for prophecy. Others say they say he was good because he was born when he was already circumcised. Now here’s what I really want to get at. And the rabbis say, at the time when Moses was born, the entire house was filled with light as it is written, and when she saw him that he was a goodly tov child, and it is the same as when God said in Genesis 1.4, and God saw the light that it was good.

So here we have in the Talmud itself this kind of correlation between the story of the birth of the world and of light, and here the birth of Moses, who we now know was originally possibly called Tuvia, and it makes the connection between the verses. The final connection is that Moses is then hidden and put into a wicca basket. The t kahlo tivat gome vita in Heu. The wicker basket is called a little ark. Tevat Noah saved the world. In this case, Tevat Moshe saved Moses and you could make the argument again that that this was the beginning of saving the Jews, but also making the Jews.

So, I think it is kind of fascinating, this connection. And again, I’m just so thankful that you referenced that Sefer Shemot is called Book Two, because it really does make them into a close sequel. But if you look at all of these texts, it really opens up your eyes to a larger degree how you study the story of the first three chapters of Shemot. Because we talk about the people of Israel growing, we talk about a new pharaoh, and we talk about an evil decree, and we all of a sudden start to gather the names.

Reinterpreting the Torah

If you read this book by Wright, and you read it from the higher textual analysis, he starts to pick apart the verses in a fascinating way. Where, you know, when Moses is born and he’s considered good, there’s really no reference to this decree of that he should be killed. And when Miriam appears, and then later when at the burning bush, God makes reference to Aaron, it’s kind of almost as though a cast of characters is being formulated as we speak. Putting this Moses into context, you really can see if you start looking at the verses as they’re written, that there are kind of, like, sometimes hard to understand introductions of different characters.

Some things don’t drive. And before I get to some examples, what he’s getting at, obviously, is that he is a proponent of this concept that the Bible was written, or at least edited, much later in time, from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, after the country of Israel the united market monarchy was ended and there was a civil war and then after the exile and what they were trying to do was to create a narrative that the people of Israel could use to become one and whole. And I just find it fascinating that the way he tracks that is a similar way to the way you see the classical commentaries here, where in a sense, when they’re making these connections between Genesis and Exodus, in a sense, they too are constructing with glue and rubber bands, a connection between these almost disparate stories.

Does that make any sense to you at all?

AM: Yeah, I mean, I like that a little bit, you know, how they pull together stories that don’t seem to connect to one another, right?

GS: Yeah, yeah, I mean, his whole point, and this is where the beauty of his book, which I can’t recommend enough, is that basically I had always read the Torah from a perspective of the Jews went chronologically from Leich Lecha to the patriarchs to going down into Egypt and then the Exodus and conquering the land of Israel, and then they kind of fell off into a monarchy. And we’ve all in previous episodes talked about how there’s these discussions, why do you need a king when God is your king?

And then ultimately, where they fall apart is in the land of Israel. So it’s almost like a rise and then a decline. And of course, that’s because when I and I would suggest most of us read the Torah, we’re reading it chronologically, from the beginning, the middle to the end. And what he does, it’s almost a paradigm shift. He says, if you believe that Ezra and Nehemiah were pretty much at a much later date, responsible for collecting these narratives and putting them all together, after the catastrophe of losing it all, in a sense, it’s a different way of looking at the whole story.

You look backwards, and you say, what threads are they? What is the story? What is the story that they are creating? Why would they make this connection between the Teva and the Ark of Noah and the Ark of Moses? Why would they try to connect these people going down, 70 individuals at the end of Genesis, to a new nation beginning in Egypt? And his whole premise is they’re trying to create a narrative that’s going to help the Jewish people survive when they don’t have a temple, when they don’t have a king, and to show them that they were created, actually, in an exile, and they were created from all of these disparate elements.

I just think it’s a fascinating way of looking at it,

AM: Well, that last point is a super interesting point, and that is it prepares the Jews for their life later in exile. It means it knows that Jewish history is going to be a Jewish history of exile, and therefore the stories in the Bible are stories to help the Jews deal with that exile. Now, that’s not a very traditional way of looking at it, because in tradition, you’re not supposed to believe that we’re a people of exile. You’re supposed to believe that we’re a people in the land, but we didn’t deserve it, so we were sent into exile.

He’s kind of saying that exile is, it was kind of known from the beginning that we would be a people of exile.

GS: So, the only thing that I would add to that and embellish that with is I think he switches the word from exile to maybe catastrophe is a strong word, but what he claims makes the Bible such a unique document and one that has inspired so many people for millennium is that it was the 1st scribal [molding of national narrative]. He spends a whole chapter or two on the book of Eicha, of Lamentations, where the loss is what is that defines us. And he claims that there were no other empires or great nations that would try to fix things by focusing on what was wrong and what was bad.

And so the case that he makes, I think, has less to do with exile and return and more to do with So you’ve lost something. So you lost what you think made you important and what made you distinct, but alert, that’s not what made you distinct and unique. And it’s only through identifying that and going back and reconstructing it that the Jewish people were able to find their mojo. And their mojo was that what define them, and again, I would say less the word exile, but more that the glue that bound them had nothing to do with what would be the most obvious.

Borders, a monarchy, leaders, even ritual and temple. What made them unique was that they shared this common heritage, what we call nation building, what we call a joint, a shared narrative, and that’s ultimately the whole point of this book.

AM: See, that’s a very important point, this idea of shared narrative, right? Isn’t that important that we, you know, that’s what everyone always looks for now is a shared narrative.

GS: Yeah, yep. And this, he argues that the Bible, the Hebrew Bible, is the first and possibly most glorious attempt to create that. Now, he doesn’t, just like I quoted the Talmud, he quotes other places in the Bible. So, for instance, in Isaiah, 2nd Isaiah, he quotes chapter 40, where Isaiah says, did you know, have you not heard, have you not been told from the very first? Have you not discerned how the earth was formed, how the earth was founded, so its inhabitants seem like grasshoppers who spread out the skies like gores.

He goes on and he starts then talking from Genesis. He talks about the power of the storm and the world. Who created this? The one who sends out their host to count. He calls them each by name. Not a single one fails to appear. Who do you say, O Jacob? Why declare, O Israel, my way is hid from God? He makes this transition from creation to the people of Israel, And what the argument is, is that you have God. So, you know, when I say and when you say a shared narrative, you can’t overlook the fact that the shared narrative has to do with a shared narrative in terms of a belief in a God who has given the people a mission.

But the point that I made before, that that mission still either is not limited by boundaries or transcends boundaries, transcends walls, transcends a temple, transcends a king, that is the point that he says that they are trying to make. He says, the breathtaking poetry of Second Isaiah features the major themes of the biblical narrative, creation, the patriarchs, matriarchs, the exodus. Many of the poems date to the time of the Persian Empire, which conquered Babylon in 539 BC.

And what he’s trying to put together by combining this and lamentations And all of the other more prophetic writings is that they were creating something that had never been created before. They were creating a national identity, a familial slash a nation identification that transcended so many other things that everyone else, including the participants, probably thought were required. And that’s why he says that the scribes of Ezra and Nehemiah, and even has a whole chapter on how scribes became kind of came to the fore with the editing of these texts, were able to craft this amazing narrative.

The Significance of Jewish Narrative

And I just found it, I guess to me, what was fascinating is the paradigm shift between reading the text from beginning going forward and reading them of how would you have read them looking back. And therefore, if you’re a classical traditional Jew, you go how brilliant that this story had within it, the glue and the connectors. That enabled it to create this narrative going backwards. And if you’re more of an academic and you look at a kind of a documentary hypothesis where these texts were put together, how brilliant they were in constructing this whole thing so that, I mean, he gets into the southern kingdom, the northern kingdom, how each one added and had their own stories and felt kind of related to different players, different places, and how it was all kind of woven together, sometime with great fluidity, sometimes a little bit of a jumpy ride, but it was put together to create this narrative that would enable the people to not only survive but to flourish.

AM: First of all, that’s amazing, but I would add one piece to that. You see, he could only write this book and make this argument about the story of the Exodus because the story of the Exodus became our fundamental text because it’s the text of the Seder. Meaning that’s the text that Jews go back to every single year. There’s no other text in all of our writings that we go back to in the same way. You might say the Book of Esther, but it’s not the same thing, right? I mean, the Seder somehow kind of frames the whole Jewish year.

And so, therefore, all the points he makes and when he takes it to Isaiah and all of that, but you have to keep in mind the fact, and we still do this today by sitting at the Seder and telling the same story. That’s what v’hi sh’amda means. That’s, I mean, I don’t know if he brings that as a proof, but v’hi sh’amda shebachol dor v’dor omdim aleinu l’chaloteinu, which means in every generation they try to kill us, means it’s the experience of exile that’s the most important experience.

GS: You know what I love about what you just said is that I was thinking lately, you know, we all know that the canon of the Bible was closed at a certain date, and then we had maybe the Talmud and the Mishnah, but where did Jewish creativity and writing continue? And I think, first and foremost, it’s in our liturgy. I mean, even today, you as a rabbi, whether it’s taking a prayer that maybe is not normally said on a given Shabbat, and saying this Shabbat merits that we say this, or a piyut, and I think what you just touched upon is that yes, when the rabbis wrote the Haggadah, and of course the Haggadah is still being written, we all know that from our series on the Haggadah.

AM: You’re the expert on that,

GS: Right? This is exactly what we’re talking about, that even the most classic and traditional Jew can understand, that how these texts were used, that I started by quoting in Deuteronomy, where it says, Ve’he sheamda ub’chol dor v’dor that this is the story of the birth and the creation and the nurturing of our people, that is what ends up in our highest liturgical moment and experience, which is the Passover Seder. The fact that it says in every generation, they will come and destroy us, not so much from a negative, because I think that’s the real takeaway from what this guy’s rights book is about, that it might come out of calamity, but calamity almost becomes like a cleansing moment, where you get to throw away all of the peripherals, all of those unnecessary elements that you thought were critical for what it means to be a nation, and say that’s not what binds you.

It’s something much more profound and powerful than that. And I think that is really, at the end of the day, the combined message of whether it’s an academic work at the level of Wright, or it’s us just kind of surveying and reviewing the rabbinic literature, looking at how Isaiah kind of ties these different stories together, how they were used. And I think I started by saying that I discovered this book on a podcast from Daniel Gordis that clearly is Israel from the inside. It’s talking about this moment.

And I think that the only thing that we can all agree about this moment is that it’s a moment created by an unbelievable, unfathomable disaster, catastrophe. And it’s going to hurt, and it continues to hurt, but I think it offers some solace to know that the brilliance of our people actually were created from catastrophes. That when we look back now at our narrative, we can look back to the biblical narrative, we can look back to the 75-year narrative of the Jewish state. What we’re going to have to do is to, through rubber bands and glue and sometimes very elegant maneuvers, and sometimes not so much create a joint narrative that comes out of this.

And if we do that, I think we can be so much stronger. And while we can never be thankful for the catastrophe that caused this, I think we can do it justice. And not let it go to waste. And that’s why I found not only this book so inspiring, but the fact that Gortys brought the book and saw in it the insight that it can provide us at this moment and put it into the context of Jewish history and Jewish text writing.

AM: I think that’s really the appropriate way to end this discussion. And that is to say that, you know, the events of October 7th and the events of the war, they’re terrible, but they’re part of a Jewish narrative. And we need to see everything in terms of part of that Jewish narrative.

GS: Amen. So- Very good. Have a good week,

AM: Everybody. Shabbat shalom. Enjoy Parshat Shemot. This was an amazing, you know, thought-provoking topic, and we look forward to seeing everybody next week. Shabat Shalom.

GS: Shabbat Shalom. And we found out today what Moses’ name really was. It was Tuvia, it was good. I found out the name of my new nephew, Levi Akiva. We should all have children that give us the light and make us survive and flourish. Shabbat shalom, and I’ll see you all next week.

So welcome, Rabbi. Usually, before we start, we go over, what did you do in your week? Or in this case, what did you do over the Christmas vacation? But I saved that for the podcast. Because I don’t know about you, Rabbi, but when I was in the yeshiva, on Christmas night and Christmas day, we didn’t learn Torah.

We didn’t want to give z’chut. We didn’t want to give credence, we didn’t want to give brownie points to Jesus, to Christianity, and learn on that day. So there were some that would actually tear the toilet paper for the rest of the year for Shabbat. Was called Nitul Nacht.

1:05   Rabbi Adma Mintz That’s funny, right?

GS: And it was called Nital Nach… what does that mean?

AM Nobody knows. I want to tell you something. Nobody knows where that phrase comes from But that’s what it’s called. Christmas Eve is called nitl nacht.

GS So I got an email a week or two before Christmas from an organization called Torah on the Move. Is that what it is? Torah in Motion. And you are one of their scholars. I am. They.

AM I am. They had an amazing Christmas Day Program

GS So it’s called a Yom Iyun, a day of focus and depth, and it was called Judaism Encounters the World, December 25th online Yom Iyun. So yours truly paid, I made a contribution, and I had nothing else to do on Christmas morning, so there was no tree, there were no presents to unwrap, so I went on to five hours of this Yom Iyun.

AM Wow, you’re amazing. Okay.

3:02 So tonight’s podcast is really influenced by what I learned on that Yom Iyun. Most of it was about Judeo-Christian relationships. The first talk was from a rabbi, Dr. Yaakov Negan, who is a rabbi and a doctor, but he’s a director of Ohr Torah Stones Institute for Interfaith Dialogue in Beit Midrash. I’ve actually met him.

AM He grew up on the Upper West Side. He’s a fascinating guy, isn’t he?

GS He is, and he received ordination from REITS, which is Yeshiva University, and a Ph.D. In Jewish philosophy from the Hebrew University, and he is an expert on Jewish-Muslim relationships. And I’m actually going to play a little snippet from his introduction, because even though the most of what we’re going to talk about is Christian-Jewish relationships and how it affects the text of our Pasha and also Bereshit, I think he said something that so resonates with me that I want to play it, and I want to get your response to it.

So here we go

If religion is part of the problem, Religion, therefore, must be part of the solutions in our conflicts. Now, the first part is undeniable. The genocidal, anti-Semitic atrocities of the Hamas are done in the name of religion. They even called their attack the Al-Aqsa flood. So religion being part of the problem, I think there’s a consensus about that. That second step, therefore religion should be part of any solution, that might be more controversial. John Lennon, for example, thought the way to get world peace is by imagining no nations and no religion too.

4:24   Rabbi Dr. Yakov Nagen  If religion is part of the problem, Religion, therefore, must be part of the solutions in our conflicts. Now, the first part is undeniable. The genocidal, anti-Semitic atrocities of the Hamas are done in the name of religion. They even called their attack the Al-Aqsa flood. So, religion being part of the problem, I think there’s a consensus about that. That second step, therefore religion should be part of any solution, that might be more controversial. John Lennon, for example, thought the way to get world peace is by imagining no nations and no religion too.

Religion is making so much problems, so let’s just get rid of it. But the problem is, first of all… Religion and identity are so fundamental, you can’t just imagine them to go away. They’re a reality. You have to deal with them.

GS I have to say, I mean, Rabbi, you know, I am not a, I wouldn’t consider myself a halachic Jew. But one of, I believe that religion, like love, like aesthetics, is part and parcel of the human psyche (condition). And that it can never be ignored, lest of all by me. I love it. I love the way that man, women, humankind learns, interacts, and figures out who we are based on how we understand our relationship with something spiritual. But I also believe, As this rabbi just said, that if I was getting a major in political science, if I was going into diplomacy, I think that every diplomat should have a minor in religion.

Because it’s so clear to me that whatever you call it, whether it’s something that we should try to run away from, or it’s, as I believe, it’s part of our human nature, you can’t ignore religion, and it is such, in the words of the Talmud, it is a som ha-chayim, or it’s a som ha-mavet. It is either a drug for good or it’s a drug for death. And that’s one of the things that drives me in my learning on a regular basis, because I really believe that religion and our religion, it’s a responsibility.

It’s important. It has outcomes, and it affects the world. Is that how you read what he just said? I mean, do you agree?

7:19 AM Absolutely. Read it. I mean, you know, he quotes John Lennon, imagine no religion. But, you know, the world wouldn’t be better with no religion. Like you said, religion makes us who we are, whatever our religion is. And, you know, the question is, he said it, how can religion be part of the solution? And that’s a hard thing because to respect someone else’s religion is very, very difficult. You know, to, to, to respect their politics, to say that a group is on a land and therefore that’s their land and they can’t be thrown out of their land, that’s pragmatic.

But to accept other people’s religion, to imagine that there are different truths, that’s a very difficult thing for people.

GS So one of the lectures that was during this day of learning was from Rabbi Dr. Martin Lakshin, and the subject of the lecture was Christian Influences on Jewish Biblical Interpretation. And as someone who has a weekly Parsha podcast, I was focused on, was he going to use any verses from our Parsha? And lo and behold, he did. And this is a scholar who literally, as per his title, He, you know, I have many times, we have many times, as we’ve studied text, we don’t have any parameters. If there is a Christian scholar, whether it’s Kierkegaard or whoever, that says something fascinating about a verse or a concept that we’re dealing with, It could be a Muslim.

We’ve dealt with very Muslim how the Koran deals with the Akedah and other things. We love the fact that our tradition, our scripture, is studied by millions, I would say billions of people. But the purpose of his talk was that actually there are Christian influences on great Jewish scholars. So that’s how we get to our parasha. We’re in Genesis 49. As I said in the intro, this is the last parasha in the book of Genesis. And Jacob called his sons and said, Come together, that I may tell you what is to befall you in the days.

The Enigmatic Reference to Shiloh

10:01 GS Assemble and hearken, the sons of Jacob, hearken to Israel your father. And he blesses Reuben, who was his firstborn. And then he blesses Shimon and Levi. And then in verse nine, he talks talking about Judah, who we all know the tribe of Judah is where King David came from, where the Messiah is understood to come from So in verse nine, it says, Judah is a lion’s whelp. Oh, pray my son, have you grown? He crouches, lies down like a lion. This is the Lion of Judah. Like a lioness, who dares rouse him?

Then in verse 10 it says, the scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet. So that tribute shall come to him, until he comes to Shiloh, and the homage of peoples be his.” So all of a sudden, it seems that everybody is interested in what this enigmatic reference is, until he comes to Shiloh. And that is the title of today’s class. So, Rashi says, until the King Messiah will come, who will be the kingdom? And thus too, Rashi continues, does Onkelos render it.

A Midrashi interpretation is Shiloh is the same as Shai? Lo, a present unto him. The bottom line is it’s one of the many verses that we have where the translation is not altogether clear. We have an enigmatic reference to a word named Shiloh, and Rashi references the Messiah.

AM Just, we have to say one thing, this is poetry, because these are the blessings that Jacob gives to his son. So, you’re right, often in the Torah we don’t know what something means, but when it’s poetry, in every language, you know, poetry always means something beyond what the words themselves mean.

GS Absolutely. And this particular piece of poetry was captured by the Abraham religions. So if you look at the Latin Vulgate, it says, “‘The scepter shall not be taken away from Judah, nor a ruler from his fire, till he comes that is to be sent.’ So it thinks of Shiloh, maybe as there was a—the scribe missed a Shilach instead of a Shiloh, and he that is to be sent. According to Muslims, they believe that Muhammad is called Shiloh. So lo and behold….

AM Based on this verse!

GS Yes, Absolutely! We have a verse that all three quote-unquote Abrahamic religions are looking at as a prophecy for their particular Savior. Now, the scholar that I quoted, this Rabbi Dr. Martin Lakshin, uses this as an example. His belief, he is a scholar in the Rashbam. The Rashbam was the grandson of Rashi, correct? Correct. Yeah. So he, in his lecture, tried to show where the Rashbam was influenced, was aware, interacted, communicated, engaged with Christian scholarship. So, in this particular pasuk, the Rashbam says, the exegesis refutes the view of the heretics, especially that of the Christians, who claim that shiloh, spelt here with a hey at the end, and the city known as Shiloh, spelt in the scripture as Shiloh with a vav, as in Samuel, are not the same.

The one same verse. The point that needs to be made is that the Rashbam is engaged in what typically we would call polemic, which is that he’s aware of Christian commentaries on this verse, and he takes pains to explain why they are wrong. But if you want to talk about the beginning of a conversation, the conversation has started. He says Yakov, as opposed to the view of the Christians, did not elevate the position of Yehuda to that of being a savior, beginning at this point in time, but he predicted Block go on and on.

He brings this verse initially to show that the rash Bam is engaged with christian interpretations, and he brings, actually, two other verses from our apasha that talk about how literally the Rashbam engaged both with Christians and, believe it or not, with his grandfather. One day, my grandchildren will listen to this podcast and they will learn that the Rush bomb talked Tora very, not deferentially, with his grandfather. He says uh in uh forty nine nine that uh it says that, and my son Yehudah is saying that after you have risen from dealing with the spoils No enemy will dare.

He says, all those who understood Yaakov, referring to the sale of Joseph in this verse, do not understand the sentence structure, nor paid attention to the tone signs. He is referring to his grandfather.

AM To Rashi, yeah, that’s funny.

GS In 49.9 it says, from the prey literally tearing, from the deed which I suspected you when I said, Joseph is torn to pieces. He says again, he refers to Rashi and says a difference. So, the one thing that this scholar on Rashbam establishes is that number one, that the Rashbam was aware of other interpretations of the Torah, and two, was not afraid to not only disagree with his grandfather, but to stake his own path. And I’ve included in the source sheet literally screenshots of the slideshow that…

17:50 AM Yeah, It’s a great slideshow. That’s a great addition.

GS …that this Martin Lachschin sent us. And, you know, Rosh Bam was 1080 to 1160, and there was a seminary called the Victrines, And he goes at great lengths to show that it’s clear that they were influenced by the Rashbam, and the Rashbam was influenced by them. And the source that he brings, since we’re ending Genesis, is the story of the three angels that come to Abraham, if you recall, before Sarah and Abraham realize that they can have a child, before the angels go to Sodom and talk about the destruction.

And all of the Jewish commentaries are challenged by the fact that the verses start in Genesis 18, by God appeared to him. So, God is talking to Abraham, and three men who were angels come to him. And then he said to the chief angels, And it goes on and on. And Rabbi, you and I, we did a whole session on Ha Nat, or Him on welcoming the guests, because the rabbis learned from here, how can you be talking to God and then turn to three men or three angels that are coming and tend to their needs. And the Midrash says this is a problem, but it teaches us a profound lesson, which is that accepting and welcoming guests is like being makabel the shechina.

But like any great Midrash, what it is doing is it’s addressing a problem. And the Rashbam looks at this problem And he makes a radical, an absolute radical interpretation, which is that there were three angels, and the first angel was called Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh. And he stayed with Abraham, and the other two angels left. And the reason why it is so radical is obviously we’re talking about three, which reminds us of the Trinity, and Justin Martyr talks about the first angel was an insight or a reflection of God who stayed with Abraham, and the other two were reflections of God who left.

The point that this scholar made was that the Rashbam may have been influenced or may have seen things in a similar fashion and was not off-put, by the interpretations of Christian scholars who were studying the same text, and who came to a different solution. It wasn’t so much that we Jews leave our God to be accepting of guests. Rather, God was perceived in three ways. And his point was, and this was the point of ultimately of his whole discussion, was that we can’t always look at when Jewish scholars quote Christian scholars, it’s not always polemics.

Perspectives on Interfaith Conversations

21:39 GS Sometimes it’s a conversation, and sometimes as two peoples who are infatuated and are focused on the same text, we can learn from each other.

AM Again, we’ll take each little piece, but on the whole, and I’m sure he talked about this, it’s amazing to think about France in the 1100s, when the Rashbam lived and when Rashi lived, the period that he’s talking about. Because that’s during the Crusades. That was a time when Christians would go into Jewish communities, Jewish towns, and they would literally put a knife to the Jews’ throat and say, convert to Judaism or we’re going to kill you. So, on one hand, that’s going on, but literally parallel to that, like parallel train tracks, we have conversations going on in the academies between Rashbam and the Christian scholars of Bible.

So it’s really something amazing just to imagine that both of these things are happening at the same time. And the truth is, if we’re allowed to take it to modern times, you know, you talk today about all the problems in America and American universities and anti-Semitism and all the terrible things, and then you read articles and things that are going on and conversations and classes that are going on and how much, you know, how much knowledge is being exchanged and how much Jewish knowledge is being exchanged.

You have to understand that sometimes these things can go as parallel train tracks. The fact that there’s bad things happening doesn’t prevent the good things from happening.

23:23 GS I love the fact that you put it into context, and we are going to end tonight with the ending of Rabbi Yaakov Nagin, who started our conversation about exactly what you’re discussing, which is even though these terrible moments in Jewish-Muslim relationships, there is conversations going on. So I love that you put it into context. But I want to give you the whole spectrum of what I experienced on Christmas with this Yom Ha’iyyun. There is a very primal, pivotal, seminal thinker, Rabbi Menachum HaMeiri.

Who is a game-changer in relationship to relationships with Christianity and Islam. And he’s quoted, but he was – I renewed my interest in him, and Menachem Hameiri has something to say about every time in the Bible that it talks about avada zara. Which at the end of the day is strange worship, or avodat kochavim, worship of the stars. And what he says, and he’s not totally unique, Maimonides says similar things, but nonetheless he is pivotal and a paradigm changer in what he says, is gedurim b’darchei hadatot.

He establishes a category, and he says that if non-Jews have a religion that is moral and that respects human life and the fact that we are all created in the image of God, that is the most important thing, not the particular variations of how they worship or what they worship, or their rituals. And so much of Jewish halacha and Jewish theology prior to him, and even after him, had been focused on, is there an idol? Is there something that looks like a human being in Christianity? What is the focus of their worship?

And he really was a paradigm changer. And he said that really what is important in distinguishing between the them and the us, between the monotheists and those who in the Bible are characterized as idol worshipers, has less to do with theology and more to do with the way of living in terms of respecting humanity and respecting that humanity is created in the image of God. And one of the speakers, to my absolute wonder and surprise, quoted and says that Rabbi Riskin is one of The foremost scholars who has put forward this, and he has, and it’s in the source sheet, says, and therefore, while we can say that Christianity, and we can say that Islam, in their most classical interpretation, are totally within the realm of Meiri’s understanding of what an acceptable monotheistic religion is, once they cross the border and start killing people and start engaging in terrorism and start lacking that respect for human existence, that’s when you draw the line.

And it just seemed to me it was so important for our understanding today about who our allies are, who our friends are, where there is potential to move forward, and where the lines are that we can pass.

27:45 AM I couldn’t agree more. Again, you know, it’s so amazing to take that class of Professor Lukshin and, you know, about Rashbam in the 1100s, and to say that that’s exactly what we’re talking about today, you know, during this difficult time in Israel. That’s an amazing thing, isn’t it? But that’s, you talked about, you know, the power of religion. That’s the power of religion. It’s above time. It’s relevant always. And it’s a powerful fort that’s.

GS The key. So the Meiri I had heard of before. What I had not heard of before was the following Rav Yaakov Emdin. So in Pirkei Avot, Ethics of the Father, Chapter 4.11, Rabbi Yochanan Sandler said, Every assembly, a kol knisiah, that is for the sake of heaven, will in the end endure, and every assembly which is not for the sake of heaven will not endure in the end. So, actually, I’ll be honest with you, I think in the lecture they called, called machloket, called every argument, but it took me a little bit of research to find that Rav Yaakov Emdin’s commentary was not on that verse or that part of the Mishnah Avot, but it was 4.11, this aknisiyah shehi l’shem shumayim.

And Rav Akom Emdin comments on the teaching in Pirkei Avot. And he interprets this to refer to Christianity and Islam, who have emerged from us and built their altars on the foundation of our divine religion. Compared with the nations of the world who preceded them, who did not recognize God, their gathering, their kinesiot, is considered for the sake of heaven. He places all three faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam into one category by referring to the three us, the three of us, l’shaloshtam.

He talks about the three datot ha-elohit. It is amazing to me that you have a – Rav Achum Emden is a powerful rabbinic authority, and he saw Pirkei Avot as an argument that is for eternity or for a long time was between the three religions of Abraham. And I had never heard that before, but it is, you know, when this time of year comes, there’s a lot of memes going around that say to those who claim that the Jews are colonizers, that Jesus actually was a Jew, and he was born in Bethlehem.

There’s a lot of that going on. But the flip part of that is that we Jews, at this time of year, and we look to what Judaism spawned, and what our tradition spawned, and it spawned Christianity, and it spawned Islam. And you have this Rav Yaakov Erendon who talks about that the arguments that we’re having have the potential not only to last long, But ultimately, I would hope to potentially be resolved. I had never heard of this Yubav Yakov Emdin before.

31:34 AM Neither have I. That was a great source. This was great. I’m happy, I’m sorry that I didn’t listen to those classes because they sound amazing. This was really interesting, and again, you know, we talk about Torah, we talk about Jewish history, but we’re really talking about today. So, thank you, Jeffrey. Next week, this week, Chazak, Chazak v’Nitzchazek, we finish the book of Breshit. And next week we look forward to starting the Book of Shemot with you. Next week, Thursday, we’re going to do a Lunch and Learn at 1 o’clock.

We can’t wait to see everybody.

32:07 GS Fantastic. And as I promised, we were going to end with Rabbi Dr. Yaakov Nagin, who ended his talk by talking about how actually there is a silver cloud, even in these terrible days, when you look in terms of Judaism and Islam. So with your permission, I’m going to go ahead and play that now. Yes, great.

Acts of Heroism and Unity

32:32 Rabbi Dr. Yakov Nagen He heard about when the massacre began, he realized he had to get there fast. He took his minibus and under very heavy fire, people tried to stop him. He went in, he contacted the people that he was in touch with, he managed to squeeze 30 people into his minibus, and since he’s a Bedouin and knows all the side roads, he drove them out. He drove them out through the side roads, managed to save not only the 30 people there, but led a convoy of cars after him. He saved dozens of lives. And as I told him, when I met him, there’s a phrase, and the Mishnah.

He heard about when the massacre began, he realized he had to get there fast. He took his minibus and under very heavy fire, people tried to stop him. He went in, he contacted the people that he was in touch with, he managed to squeeze 30 people into his minibus, and since he’s a Bedouin and knows all the side roads, he drove them out. He drove them out through the side roads, managed to save not only the 30 people there, but led a convoy of cars after him. He saved dozens of lives. And as I told him, when I met him, there’s a phrase, and the Mishnah.

Says, if you save a life, it’s like you saved the world. They said, you truly are Yusuf al-Sadiq. And I was with him again in the city of Rahat, the imamim of the south, together with a group of Rabbani. We spent a day volunteering together in the municipality of Rahat with Israeli flags everywhere. We packed, half a day we packed food packages for all the refugees of the area from Otef Aza. Then we did a joint study and then we were with Palel together. So yes, the evil is real, it’s there, it’s demonic, but there are other forces and we must know to get our victory in a global world we must know how can we bring reality in a better place in a long process and maybe end with the words the eternal people do not fear a long journey.

34:54 GS And with that, we end this week, and we end the book of Bereshit. So it is a long journey. We do not give up. We continue to learn. We continue to be open. And we look forward to next week, beginning the book of Shabbat Shalom.

Geoffrey Stern: So Rabbi, we had off for the last two weeks for Hanukkah. We just lucked out. Hanukkah was from Thursday to Thursday. I hope you enjoyed the vacation as much as I did. I do have to thank two Madlik listeners, Henry and Howard, who actually reached out to me and they said, what, no notice? Where are you? We need our Madlik podcast!

Adam Mintz: Makes us feel important.

Geoffrey Stern: That’s right. So for all of you who missed us, we missed you too, and it’s wonderful to be back. I should say that during the week of Hanukkah, I lost a very favorite aunt, Adele Suslak. And since tonight we’re going to be talking about being lost, passing away, not being present, I gotta say that one of the fascinating things about this woman was that she had a tradition every, absolutely every milestone, every birthday anniversary of a very large family, she would reach out and call you, send you a text, And in the last year and a half, when she wasn’t feeling that well, what you would ultimately do on a birthday, you would say, did Adele send you a text? Did Adele call you? And I have a feeling that years going forward, we’re going to remember Adele on our birthday. And that, to me, is an irony, a delicious irony, of being present when you’re not here anymore. And that’s the kind of thing we’re going to discuss tonight. So this is for you, Adele. How are you, Rabbi?

2:40 Adam Mintz: Well, thanks. That’s really a sweet story. It’s all about your aunt. And, you know, that’s true, you know, about being present, being present when you are and being present when you’re not is really a good topic. And actually, it’s a good topic for the end of the year, like you said, because people kind of reflect on, you know, what the year was and what the year could be. So I’m looking forward to tonight’s discussion.

3:02 Geoffrey Stern: Yeah, I mean, we associate these feelings  maybe with Christmas when everybody’s celebrating, but I was having dinner with a friend during Hanukkah, and he says, you know, I kind of got depressed this week. I was thinking of all the things that I’ve done. What difference does it make? So I do think it has something to do with, on the one hand, the darkness, and on the other hand, there are celebrations going on. And so it is a unique week to talk about this. So let’s just jump into the Parsha. We’ve been gone for a few weeks, but now we’re at Joseph, Prince of Egypt.

Joseph, Prince of Egypt and the Impact of Absence

3:37 GS: His long-lost brothers have shown up. They do not yet know the relationship, who he is, and we’re in Genesis 44.18. (18) Then Judah went up to him and said, “Please, my lord, let your servant appeal to my lord, and do not be impatient with your servant, you who are the equal of Pharaoh. (19) My lord asked his servants, ‘Have you a father or another brother?’ (20) We told my lord, ‘We have an old father, and there is a child of his old age, the youngest; his full brother is dead, so that he alone is left of his mother, and his father dotes on him.’

So, you know, I’ve always talked about how amazing our scripture is, the Torah is, in creating these dramatic moments. And this is a dramatic moment. Joseph is alive. He’s talking to his brothers who don’t know who he is, and his brothers say directly to his face, our brother is dead, meaning to say, you are dead.

And so that’s what triggered my thinking about that wonderful movie called A Wonderful Life, where this guy is depressed, about to jump off a building and end his life, and this angel comes and explains to him what the world would look like if he wasn’t there. And here is this Joseph. He’s meeting his family and he hasn’t been there all these years. And it kind of creates that same kind of dynamic where you’re looking at your life and you’re not there. I mean, I was just very impressed by it.

What about you, Rabbi?

5:43 AM I mean, obviously that’s everybody’s favorite movie, especially this time of year. And I think, you know, that’s a great connection in this week’s Parsha. I think that’s something that’s great to talk about. So let’s look at the sources and let’s go.

5;57 GS Great. So Rashi is struck by the fact that Judah said his brother is dead, which is clearly a lie, at least from Rashi’s perspective. So Rashi says he uttered this untruth out of fear. He thought If I tell him that he, meaning Joseph, is alive, he may say, bring him to me. So they’re trying to excuse, and it seems like almost universally all of the sources talk about Yehuda the Tzadik. How could he possibly lie? And this is the mainstream approach of the rabbis. I need to say that in Genesis 42, a few chapters ago, again this came up, and they replied while being interrogated by Joseph, And they replied, We, your servants, were twelve brothers, son of a certain man in the land of Canaan. The youngest, however, is now with our father, and one is no more. So there they didn’t say he was dead. They used more of a euphemism that, of course, I think was more truthful. But one or the other, the point is, you wonder whether he’s lying or he is telling the truth. I mean, for all intensive purposes, is Joseph not dead to all of them? And if you sell a child as a slave, you know, Maybe you are on fair ground thinking that he probably died. It was a death sentence. But it’s fascinating that there is a challenge here.

I just love, from the perspective of Joseph looking at them and hearing this, this thing about “enenu”. He’s not here. He wasn’t here for us. He’s not here for us. He’s not a part of our life. He’s not a part of our narrative. Kind of interesting, don’t you think?

8:01 AM I would ask the following question. So what happens? They sell Joseph so they probably think that Joseph is alive somewhere, but that he’s irrelevant because he’s been sold into slavery. We don’t have to worry about him. We don’t have to think about him. He’s gone. Do you think after all of this back and forth with this viceroy of Egypt, you think that the brothers began to wonder a little bit? That’s what I want to know. You know, whether this guy is Joseph, whether Joseph is behind the scenes, like, it just seems like too many things are going wrong.

And like the things that are going wrong are the things that hit them, you know, closest, you know, closest to what matters to them. Get to feel like maybe, just maybe, they’re beginning to wonder a little bit. I don’t know. I’m just raising that as a possibility. Jacob sees the coat, so he assumes that Joseph is dead. But the brothers don’t necessarily assume.

9:11 GS I mean, you don’t even know if Judah told the other brothers what he did.

AM You have no idea. That’s what I’m pointing out. You just don’t know.

GS So of all the commentaries, I found the Maharal, who’s normally very metaphysical, Kabbalistic, but in his commentary, and he’s doing a commentary on Rashi, so it’s kind of a super commentary, He says, he puts into the brother’s mouth, we believe that he died because he set out and had a future and did not come. He didn’t come back to us. He’s never written. He’s never been in touch with us. And that is why we said that he is no longer. He adds almost a midrashic approach that when the ten siblings came to Egypt, They each entered a different gate, so that maybe they wouldn’t be identified as a tribe, as a group, so they could be like a sleeper cell. But in this interpretation, they entered from 10 gates because they were looking for their brother. And they determined, hu enenu, he’s not here. But certainly I think what we can all agree about is whether they were convinced at this point that he had died or not, it’s clear that he wasn’t a part of their life. And it’s just fascinating to think of Joseph looking upon this. All the questions, all the discussions that we’re having right now have to have been going through Joseph’s head as well.

Do they recognize me? Have they been thinking about me? Does my father believe that I’m alive? And from that perspective, I’d love to look at it from Joseph’s point of view, where it’s kind of this surreal scene where you’re looking at your life, but you’re not there. You’re looking at your family, but you’re not there, and you’re watching this dynamic. And we know ultimately, he exposes himself, but how long he drew this out to experience this kind of subject that we’re exploring today, which is how do you look at a world when you’re not there?

How do you evaluate your impact on a world? And I think that’s just – it comes out of the drama set by the text.

11:33 AM I think that’s good. I think that’s 100% right. I mean, I was pointing out also, the drama is, there are so many ways to read the drama of the text. Isn’t that what makes it so exciting?

GS Absolutely. Absolutely. So I thought, and maybe you have some more stories or insights, that I would use this as a way of looking at two famous stories from the Talmud that came to the top of my head, where it’s almost a back-to-the-future type of moment, where you get a character who gets to go, in these cases, into the future. And see the world without him, and then in a surprising, charming, delicious moment, realize that he’s made an impact. And they kind of tie into it from that perspective that I’m playing.

Honi Ha’ama’agel and the Carob Tree

12:32 So the first is about a famous guy called Honi Ha’ama’agel. Honi the Circle Maker, and what he was ultimately was a magic worker who could bring rain. He would draw a circle, and he would stand inside of the circle, he would pray to God, and at a time of drought, he had this amazing power that he was able to bring the rain. But the story that I am going to quote from Tainit 23 is where he saw a man who was planting a carob tree. And Honi said to him, this tree, after how many years will it bear fruit?

The man said to him, it will not produce fruit until 70 years have passed. Honi said to him, ìs it obvious to you that you will live seventy years that you expect to benefit from this tree? He said to him, That man himself found a world full of carob trees. Just as my ancestors planted for me, I too am planting for my descendants. So, ultimately, he was like saying, we don’t all get to harvest the fruits of our labor, but I’m harvesting the fruits of my ancestors’ labor, and they will harvest the fruits of mine.

So Honi sat and ate bread, and fell asleep and a cliff formed around him and he disappeared from sight and slept for seventy years. When he awoke he saw a certain man gathering carobs from that tree. Honi said to him, Are you the one who planted this tree? The man said to him, I am his son’s son. Honi said to him, I can learn from this that I have slept for seventy years, and indeed he saw that his donkey had sired several herds during these many years. Honi went home and said to the members of the household, Is the son of Honi Hamagel alive?

They said to him, His son is no longer with us, but his son’s son is alive. He said to them, I am Honi Hamagel. They did not believe him. He went to the study hall, where he heard the sages say about one scholar, His halakhot are as enlightening and as clear as in the days of Honi Hama’agel. For when Honi Hama’agel would enter the study hall, he would resolve for the sages many difficulties that they had. Honi said to them, I am he. But they did not believe him and did not pay him proper respect. Honi became very upset, prayed for mercy, and died. Rava said this explains the folks saying that people said either friendship or death, as one who has no friends is better off dead.

Wow, what a powerful Story!

15:34 AM That’s amazing.

GS I mean, at so many different levels.

AM There are so many things, what’s it about?

GS Well, I mean, I think at the most basic level, it is that lesson that we plant and others harvest, and we harvest that which previous generations planted. But it also talks about the worlds that we want to be a part of You know, if we’re talking about mortality, When it is a time for people to be harvesting that which we planted, maybe that’s not a time that we are still alive. I mean, I think it’s just fascinating that no one knew who he was, even though he was recognized and quoted, and “either friendship or death”.

He who has no friends is better off dead. Just kind of, and it’s interesting in terms of, I mean, the magic of it, obviously, the fact that it associates sleep with death. We know from the Talmud that sleep is 160th of death and that every morning when we wake up, It’s like we’re being reborn, which is a beautiful metaphor, too. Obviously, sleep is a time of dreams, and Joseph has given us enough dreams in the last few weeks for us to understand. So it’s all of these things combined, but I think it’s just kind of beautiful in terms of putting a kind of a context of what it means to have an impact on the world, what it is to be part of a world, and what also it means to have the world go on without you.

17:20 AM I like that last point. What does it mean to have the world go on without you? Right? That’s a pretty that’s a pretty powerful idea, isn’t it? That the world went on. There? It you know he was he was done and the world went on. That’s a very striking idea to me.

GS It does, I think, resonate a little bit with the Joseph story in that he wasn’t recognized. Here Honi comes and it’s future generations and he’s not recognized. But he is quoted. He’s part of the narrative, but he’s not quite part of the narrative. I find that fascinating. And then just this sense of him trying to get an answer to a question. I mean, the whole thing begins because Honi has a question. He asks the carob planter a question, and then this magical moment happens that puts him to sleep and lets him go into the future.

You know, when I was thinking about Talmudic stories, Midrashic stories, where you would go into the past, all of them, and they have many, where people, Elijah will go visit maybe Abraham and Sarah in Kevah HaMachpelah, but they’re kind of in heaven. You know, it’s an otherworldly thing. Here, you really have that back-to-the-future type of dynamic, where he’s not going to another world. He’s staying within this world. He’s being fast-forwarded, but he gets enlightened, and he gets an exposure that, you know, none of us can get unless we’re dreaming, unless we’re sleeping, unless we’re imagining.

19:12 AM So, you know, let’s just go back to Joseph for a minute. The idea of dreams, right? You know, all these parshiot that we’re studying are all the parshiot of dreams, and every dream is fulfilled. Pharaoh’s dream is fulfilled, and the, you know, and the butler’s dreams are fulfilled. The only dream that’s not fulfilled is actually Joseph’s dream. And you just wonder about that, that maybe all the story that we read this week about the brothers coming is all a fulfillment of Joseph’s dream that his father and his brothers will come and bow down before him.

So you talk about Honi HaMa’agel, you talk about fulfilling dreams. Maybe that’s what we learn from the Torah, all about fulfilling dreams.

19:57 GS And the dream somehow enables you to see the world from the outside, to have a totally different perspective on your interaction with the world. You’re kind of floating above it. You’re a part of it, but you’re not a part of it. It’s just, I love the playfulness also of it.

So the other famous story that came to mind was Moses goes up to Sinai, and he sees God adding these tale’ tagin, these crowns on the letters. And any of you who have looked at— You know,

AM We still have the crowns on the letters, of course.

GS We do, if any of you have seen a Sefer Torah and if you haven’t, get yourself an Aliyah and go up there and you’ll see that on top of the letters there were these beautiful calligraphic crowns. Moses says, master of the universe, he goes, what’s the purpose of these crowns? And God says, there is a man who is destined to be born after several generations, and Akiva ben Yosef is his name. He is destined to derive from each and every thorn of these crown mounds upon mounds of halachot. And so, the beautiful story then has Moses fast-forwarded in a time capsule to the Talmudic Academy of Akiba, and they put him in the eighth row because he’s not the smartest of the students.

That’s where the new students sit. He sat at the end of the eighth row in Akiva’s study and did not understand what they were saying. So unlike Hani, where Hani was in his prime and they were quoting him, here there’s a little bit more drama. Moses is dumbfounded. He doesn’t have a clue what Akiva’s talking about. Moses’ strength waned as he thought his Torah knowledge was deficient. When Akiva arrived at the discussion of one matter, his students said to him, My teacher, from where do you derive this? Rabbi Akiva said to them, It is a halacha LeMoshe M’Sinai It is a law that was transmitted from Moses at Sinai. When Moses heard this, his mind was put at ease, as this, too, was part of the Torah that he was to receive.” So here, again, you have, like Choni, going into the future. But unlike Choni, he’s not the master of the universe. He doesn’t have a clue what’s going on. He feels as though he hasn’t made his mark. He is nothing. And then, in this magical moment, Akiva’s asked, how do you know this? And he says, it’s a halacha from Moses at Sinai.

And it reminds me, there was a great movie with Harrison Ford [Regarding Henry]. This big time lawyer goes out to buy a pack of cigarettes, he gets shot in the head, and he obviously is recuperating, he loses all of his mental acuity, and he’s sitting a year or two later into his rehabilitation with his daughter, and she’s reading him a book, and he’s looking at her in absolute awe, and he says to his daughter, how do you know how to read? And she says, dad, you taught me how to read…. So, it’s this ability to make an impact on the world when we don’t even realize it.

It’s an ability to give other people the tools and the capacity for them to go beyond us. And I think that that makes this so special.

AM Is that the ultimate humility? Is that what it’s about? Is it about Humility?

23:50 GS Humility? Well, I mean, I think on the one hand, it’s humility to understand that you don’t have all the answers, and the carob tree doesn’t end with you. But on the other hand, it’s amazing sense of appreciation that what we create goes beyond us, and that there are others who will take it further.

AM Humility, isn’t it? Absolutely.

24:14 GS So I just found those two stories to be quite amazing. The other story that doesn’t come from the Talmudic or the Midrashic period is by a favorite book of mine by Agnon, and it’s called The Crooked Shall Be Made Straight. I’ve quoted this story before, but basically it’s of a nebuch, of a loser of a husband who can’t make a living and he leaves his wife and he becomes a beggar. To be able to beg, he gets a letter from a great rabbi who says, yeah, you can give this guy money. And one night, he’s such a loser, he can’t make ends meet, he’s at a bar, and the guy says, I’ll give you two drinks if you give me that letter. And he gives the guy the letter, and then two days later, the guy is dead. He dies, and he has the letter in his pocket. And to make a long story short, his wife back home gets word that her husband has died. She gets remarried.

The nebuch husband comes back to the town one morning to say, I just have to come home, see my wife. She’s going to greet me. But everybody’s going to a festivity and they’re going to the Brit of his wife’s son from the new husband. And if he is alive, that child is a mamzer, is a bastard.

And so you have this irony of him having to be, to do the last good thing that he can do in his life is to be legally dead. And it’s this fascinating thing about, again, watching your life go on without you and knowing that maybe the greatest contribution that you can make is not to be there. And I just found the irony of it so fascinating and of course, Agnon as always is bringing verses, and he’s a lot to do with Jacob, but you can’t help but think of this, where here Joseph is in a similar situation, where the fact that he’s not alive permits certain things, lets them divulge (and process) certain things.

I just think the dialectic is kind of so, so fascinating. And it just gives you an insight, I think, not only to the playfulness of the rabbis and Agnon, our authors, but this sense of, and it’s not, you know, one of the things that struck me is none of these have to do with death, life after death, and this spiritual type of thing. It has more to do with What is the world with us? What is the world like without us? This week I fulfilled a task (mission) that my dad wanted me to do. I finished selling the property that he wanted me to sell. And I just felt he was looking at me, and I had finished my shlichut, he had asked me to do something, and I did it. We plant the carob tree, we harvest the carob tree, it’s something that, it has a spiritual sense to it, but it also has, I don’t know, a familial, a different sense to it, and I just feel it very strongly this time of year where we’re looking at connections and who we are and who we’re not.

27:48 AM So I think that’s beautiful, all of these examples that you give and then you connect it to, you know, to your father. The idea of being present, it all goes back to the story you told about your aunt, right? The idea of being present when you’re not here anymore is a very strong idea. I’m jumping one parasha. But the Rashi says on next week’s parasha, when Jacob dies, Rashi says, Yakov, avinu lo meyt, that Jacob, our father, didn’t die. Because it doesn’t actually say he died. It says he curled up, but it doesn’t actually say he died.

Jacob continues. He’s always kind of there. You know, Elijah the prophet also doesn’t die. Elijah the prophet is there every Saturday night when we make Havdala. Elijah’s there in a Brit. There’s an idea that you’re present even when you’re no longer present. And the story you told about Moshe in the back of the Beit Midrash of Rabbi Akiva, not only are you present after you’re no longer alive, but you’re important when you’re no longer alive. That’s what that story adds for us, right?

That without you, we wouldn’t understand anything. That’s amazing!

29:03 GS So I started by saying this time of year, some of us get a little, I don’t know, whimsical, maybe a little, even tinge of depression, and we ask, what is our purpose in this world? But I said, in this time of our lives that we’re in a war, and young people are being killed before their time. And you can’t help but ask, along with their parents, along with all of Israel, what would have been had they lived? What mark would they have made? What were they robbed of? So there’s an amazing podcast by Daniel Gordis, and what he does is to bring stuff from the Israeli media that we might not necessarily see.

And in this week’s episode, he brings a will written by a soldier who was killed. And I want to end by reading that.

The family of Sergeant Shay Arvas, z’’l, who served as a combat medic in the Givati Tzabar Battalion and who fell in October in the armored personnel carrier incident in the northern Gaza Strip, received his personal belongings this week, including a “will” he wrote on his phone two weeks before his death. “Just in case…”, is how his last letter opens, the last letter he left, detailing his love for the country, his belief in the cause and his request to his family to continue their lives and be happy.

To my beloved Adar, my dear mother, the best father in the world and all my brothers, Chen and Tami Ray and Amiri, Or and Niv, Ran and Moriah, Emily and Ari and Tal and Stav and the immediate family. I want you to know how much I miss you and I love you, and the truth is that I was happy to do what I do to save people and protect the country because it’s something I always wanted. Something that has always been a part of me since I was little and now I had the opportunity to do it and give of myself to the country as well. So you know that all this was not for nothing and was worth it. All the people of Israel will continue this tradition, and love the country because people didn’t just die here for nothing, and there are people who have to protect it.

The family of Sergeant Shay Arvas, z’’l, who served as a combat medic in the Givati Tzabar Battalion and who fell in October in the armored personnel carrier incident in the northern Gaza Strip, received his personal belongings this week, including a “will” he wrote on his phone two weeks before his death. “Just in case…”, is how his last letter opens, the last letter he left, detailing his love for the country, his belief in the cause and his request to his family to continue their lives and be happy.

To my beloved Adar, my dear mother, the best father in the world and all my brothers, Chen and Tami Ray and Amiri, Or and Niv, Ran and Moriah, Emily and Ari and Tal and Stav and the immediate family. I want you to know how much I miss you and I love you, and the truth is that I was happy to do what I do to save people and protect the country because it’s something I always wanted. Something that has always been a part of me since I was little and now I had the opportunity to do it and give of myself to the country as well. So you know that all this was not for nothing and was worth it. All the people of Israel will continue this tradition, and love the country because people didn’t just die here for nothing, and there are people who have to protect it.

And all I could think about when I read this was the end of Private Ryan, where they spent so much precious life to find this Private Ryan and to spare his life.

And as the head of the battalion (Tom Hankes) is dying in his arms, he says to him, “Earn this. Just earn it”.

And in a sense, I think what this sergeant is saying, that he says he’s not dying in vain because he did what he wanted to do, protect us. But now his family, his country, his people have to go on living, but in a sense, they have to earn it. His absence, it’s the opposite of maybe A Wonderful Life where he’s shown, had he not been there, look what would have not happened. Here, this young soldier at the beginning of his life is lost.

And his absence has to drive everybody in the family and everybody in the country that he protected to be more, to be better, to be united, to love. Anyway, that’s what I took from it.

AM Thank you so much for sharing that. I had read it also and it’s just so – there are no words. You can’t really say anything. But this was an amazing topic. It’s a great way to – we’re still going to have one more this year because next Thursday night is still this year. But it’s a good – it’s really something to think about at the end of the year and I hope that everybody will enjoy Shabbat and the parsha. And our hearts and our thoughts are with everybody in Israel, and we hope, please, God, to share good news next week.

This week was amazing. I can only wait to see what next week is going to bring us in terms of the class. Shabbat Shalom.

34: 29 GS Shabbat Shalom. It is a wonderful life, but that is both something to cherish and something to be challenged by. So let us do both and try to be better because of it. Shabbat Shalom.

sss